A little Help from the gruru's

Hey fellow Sim'ers. I am a long time lurker who has gleened a lot of information from this group, but now I need some specific help for my system. Problem -- Low framerates (15 to 45, averageing 25) in Nascar 2003. I run this in 800x600 16 bit and it does not make much differance if I use DXGraphics or openGL. I usually race against 19 AI. Other options for N2003, Car Quality - Med Track Objects - some Pit crews - Low Texture Filter - Normal Mirror- Med World - Low Draw distance - 78% Features - None Effects - none Lighting - None Shadows - None What it is --- Gigabyte 7ZX-FG Motherboard with a 1.1g althon and 256 memory. Current drivers and BIOS installed. Nvidia Geforce4 ti4200 agp8X Drivers 43.45 dated 3/20/2003 Soundblaster Live Value - Latest drivers installed Realtek RTL 8139 PCI Ethernet card. I just upgraded the OS from Windows 98se to XP. This was a upgrade not a full brand new install. I had an average framerate in win98 of 30 fps. Although I didn't expect a framerate increase I didn't expect a decrease. One thing that bothers me is all the cards in the system are using IRQ9 (ALL of them, graphics, sound, ethernet). I removed them and installed them one at a time but they all use IRQ9 no matter what. Help at microsoft says this is normal. Huh? I've given a lot of info, but I know you folks will want more, just ask away. Please try to help a 49yo wannabe racecar driver. Mike Heard

"Michael Heard" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:[email hidden]:

Quoted text (42 lines)

> Hey fellow Sim'ers. > I am a long time lurker who has gleened a lot of information from this > group, but now I need some specific help for my system. > > Problem -- Low framerates (15 to 45, averageing 25) in Nascar 2003. I > run this in 800x600 16 bit and it does not make much differance if I > use DXGraphics or openGL. I usually race against 19 AI. > Other options for N2003, > Car Quality - Med Track Objects - some > Pit crews - Low Texture Filter - Normal > Mirror- Med World - Low > Draw distance - 78% Features - None > Effects - none Lighting - None > Shadows - None > > What it is --- Gigabyte 7ZX-FG Motherboard with a 1.1g althon and 256 > memory. Current drivers and BIOS installed. > Nvidia Geforce4 ti4200 agp8X Drivers 43.45 > dated > 3/20/2003 > Soundblaster Live Value - Latest drivers > installed Realtek RTL 8139 PCI Ethernet card. > > I just upgraded the OS from Windows 98se to XP. This was a upgrade not > a full brand new install. I had an average framerate in win98 of 30 > fps. Although I didn't expect a framerate increase I didn't expect a > decrease. > > One thing that bothers me is all the cards in the system are using > IRQ9 (ALL of them, graphics, sound, ethernet). I removed them and > installed them one at a time but they all use IRQ9 no matter what. > Help at microsoft says this is normal. Huh? > > I've given a lot of info, but I know you folks will want more, just > ask away. > > Please try to help a 49yo wannabe racecar driver. > > Mike Heard > > >

Well folks tell me that XP and Win2k don't care if the cards are all grouped together. Being an old 98'er...I beleive em but I don't trust the OS that does that... :) Chances are your vsync is set to on since you probably have re-installed all your drivers and such with the change of OSes. Dig into the properties, you may need coolbits, and verify that vysnc is disabled in both opengl and d3d. Next verify that FSAA is OFF and and Anistrophic filtering is off. Looks like you have covered most of the ingame stuff, but to just double check, In the game set the viewing distance to a lower setting, choose medium or lower for most options and for God's sake make sure those last three Shadow options are off! Reduce the number of visible cars fore and aft. Also lower by one or two clicks the number of sounds played. Finally a good trick to gain a few fps is to race online. By not having to compute the driving of 40+ cars, you lighten the load on the cpu. You may also want to reduce (by one or two cliks) the sound acceleration for your sound card in the direct X settings. In the bios you can set the AGP to a max of 4 and probaby also adjust the AGP aperature...try 128 and then 64 to see if any difference is visible. Good luck... dave henrie

"Michael Heard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (25 lines)

> Hey fellow Sim'ers. > I am a long time lurker who has gleened a lot of information from this > group, but now I need some specific help for my system. > > Problem -- Low framerates (15 to 45, averageing 25) in Nascar 2003. I run > this in 800x600 16 bit and it does not make much differance if I use > DXGraphics or openGL. I usually race against 19 AI. > Other options for N2003, > Car Quality - Med Track Objects - some > Pit crews - Low Texture Filter - Normal > Mirror- Med World - Low > Draw distance - 78% Features - None > Effects - none Lighting - None > Shadows - None > > What it is --- Gigabyte 7ZX-FG Motherboard with a 1.1g althon and 256 > memory. Current drivers and BIOS installed. > Nvidia Geforce4 ti4200 agp8X Drivers 43.45 dated > 3/20/2003 > Soundblaster Live Value - Latest drivers installed > Realtek RTL 8139 PCI Ethernet card. > > I just upgraded the OS from Windows 98se to XP. This was a upgrade not a > full brand new install. I had an average framerate in win98 of 30 fps. > Although I didn't expect a framerate increase I didn't expect a decrease.

All those new "features" in XP take up system resources. I won't go into what you can disable and tweak in XP, but you can search around for that stuff. The first thing you need to do in N2003 is reduce your draw distance. 78% is overkill for most of the tracks anyway, especially since in your system the processor is the bottleneck. Increase draw distance = more polygons = lower framerate. You can also go into Display Properties>Settings tab>Advanced button>Geforce4 Ti 4200 tab>Direct3D Settings>More Direct3D button and set Vertical Sync mode to Always Off. That setting will probably raise the high end of your framerates, but wont do anything about the lows. If you notice any visible tearing of the image in Nascar 2003 or other sims/games you can change Vsync back to enabled. You probably won't notice the tearing in Nascar, but if you play first person or action games you will. Since you have a fairly fast graphics card you should also be able to increase your resolution to 1024x768 or even a little higher without impacting your framerates at all. Kyle

You may find that a load of '98 stuff has been left behind from the upgrade. You can get a floppy disk set from Microsofts web site that allows you to use a clean disk to install the upgrade of XP. The isnatll process will ask for the qualifying CD but you won't have any legacy bits lying around afterwards. Andi. "Michael Heard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> Hey fellow Sim'ers. > I am a long time lurker who has gleened a lot of information from this > group, but now I need some specific help for my system. > > Problem -- Low framerates (15 to 45, averageing 25) in Nascar 2003. I run > this in 800x600 16 bit and it does not make much differance if I use > DXGraphics or openGL. I usually race against 19 AI. > Other options for N2003, > Car Quality - Med Track Objects - some > Pit crews - Low Texture Filter - Normal > Mirror- Med World - Low > Draw distance - 78% Features - None > Effects - none Lighting - None > Shadows - None > > What it is --- Gigabyte 7ZX-FG Motherboard with a 1.1g althon and 256 > memory. Current drivers and BIOS installed. > Nvidia Geforce4 ti4200 agp8X Drivers 43.45 dated > 3/20/2003 > Soundblaster Live Value - Latest drivers installed > Realtek RTL 8139 PCI Ethernet card. > > I just upgraded the OS from Windows 98se to XP. This was a upgrade not a > full brand new install. I had an average framerate in win98 of 30 fps. > Although I didn't expect a framerate increase I didn't expect a decrease. > > One thing that bothers me is all the cards in the system are using IRQ9

(ALL > of them, graphics, sound, ethernet). I removed them and installed them one > at a time but they all use IRQ9 no matter what. Help at microsoft saysthis

Quoted text (10 lines)

> is normal. Huh? > > I've given a lot of info, but I know you folks will want more, just ask > away. > > Please try to help a 49yo wannabe racecar driver. > > Mike Heard > >

"Kyle Roberts" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:k7uJa.20138$[email hidden]... > > > All those new "features" in XP take up system resources. I won't go into > what you can disable and tweak in XP, but you can search around for that > stuff. The first thing you need to do in N2003 is reduce your draw > distance. 78% is overkill for most of the tracks anyway, especially sincein > your system the processor is the bottleneck. Increase draw distance = more > polygons = lower framerate. You can also go into DisplayProperties>Settings > tab>Advanced button>Geforce4 Ti 4200 tab>Direct3D Settings>More Direct3D > button and set Vertical Sync mode to Always Off. That setting willprobably > raise the high end of your framerates, but wont do anything about thelows. > If you notice any visible tearing of the image in Nascar 2003 or other > sims/games you can change Vsync back to enabled. You probably won't notice > the tearing in Nascar, but if you play first person or action games you > will. Since you have a fairly fast graphics card you should also be ableto > increase your resolution to 1024x768 or even a little higher without > impacting your framerates at all. > > Kyle Well I figured someone would point at the processor, but that just comfirms my thoughts about the problem. I've the things you and Dave Henrie have suggested with no improvement. So that leads to the question ------ What Motherboard and what chip would you (or Dave, or anyone for that matter)suggest? Keeping in mind my pimary use is Sim's, followed by internet use etc,ect. Mike Heard

"Michael Heard"

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > Well I figured someone would point at the processor, but that just > comfirms my thoughts about the problem. I've the things you and Dave > Henrie have suggested with no improvement. So that leads to the > question ------ What Motherboard and what chip would you (or Dave, or > anyone for that matter)suggest? Keeping in mind my pimary use is > Sim's, followed by internet use etc,ect. > > Mike Heard > >

Get the biggest fastest cpu you can afford, Everything else will either shine or suck based on that. Fancy Video cards choke on slow CPU's. Start there...then Video and Ram upgrades...goodluck.

"Michael Heard" Get the biggest fastest cpu you can afford, Everything else will either shine or suck based on that. Fancy Video cards ***on slow CPU's. Start there...then Video and Ram upgrades...goodluck.

I too am having problems with Nascar 2003 and my new Radeon 9700 video card. Anyone, please tell me if this sounds correct to you! My system is a 1.8 GHz P4, 512 MB RAM, AGP 4x, Radeon 9700 (non-pro version). I have installed the Catalyst 3.5 drivers. When I play Nascar 2003, I start the race at the back of the pack at around 22 fps. In-game options are all default. During the race, my fps never drops below 18 and has gone as high as 52, but usually is in the twenties somewhere. The kicker (and what I don't understand) is this: I get this same performance (within 3 fps) when I run at 800x600 or at 1600x1200. I also get this same performance whether I have my Catalyst driver settings at the minimum (max performance) or at the maximum (max quality - which by the was is at 4X AA and 8X Anis. Filtering). This seems very strange to me. The only way for me to adjust my fps, is to adjust the in game options. For example, I can increase framerate by reducing the number of cars I see ahead. This is driving me crazy! Why is my framerate not changing when I change the resolution and driver settings?! Should I return my card? Do I have a faulty card? HELP! SkykingUSA "Michael Heard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (37 lines)

> Hey fellow Sim'ers. > I am a long time lurker who has gleened a lot of information from this > group, but now I need some specific help for my system. > > Problem -- Low framerates (15 to 45, averageing 25) in Nascar 2003. I run > this in 800x600 16 bit and it does not make much differance if I use > DXGraphics or openGL. I usually race against 19 AI. > Other options for N2003, > Car Quality - Med Track Objects - some > Pit crews - Low Texture Filter - Normal > Mirror- Med World - Low > Draw distance - 78% Features - None > Effects - none Lighting - None > Shadows - None > > What it is --- Gigabyte 7ZX-FG Motherboard with a 1.1g althon and 256 > memory. Current drivers and BIOS installed. > Nvidia Geforce4 ti4200 agp8X Drivers 43.45 dated > 3/20/2003 > Soundblaster Live Value - Latest drivers installed > Realtek RTL 8139 PCI Ethernet card. > > I just upgraded the OS from Windows 98se to XP. This was a upgrade not a > full brand new install. I had an average framerate in win98 of 30 fps. > Although I didn't expect a framerate increase I didn't expect a decrease. > > One thing that bothers me is all the cards in the system are using IRQ9 (ALL > of them, graphics, sound, ethernet). I removed them and installed them one > at a time but they all use IRQ9 no matter what. Help at microsoft says this > is normal. Huh? > > I've given a lot of info, but I know you folks will want more, just ask > away. > > Please try to help a 49yo wannabe racecar driver. > > Mike Heard

[email hidden] (SkykingUSA) wrote in news:[email hidden]:

Quoted text (16 lines)

> I too am having problems with Nascar 2003 and my new Radeon 9700 video > card. Anyone, please tell me if this sounds correct to you! > > My system is a 1.8 GHz P4, 512 MB RAM, AGP 4x, Radeon 9700 (non-pro > version). I have installed the Catalyst 3.5 drivers. When I play > Nascar 2003, I start the race at the back of the pack at around 22 > fps. In-game options are all default. During the race, my fps never > drops below 18 and has gone as high as 52, but usually is in the > twenties somewhere. > > The kicker (and what I don't understand) is this: I get this same > performance (within 3 fps) when I run at 800x600 or at 1600x1200. I > also get this same performance whether I have my Catalyst driver > settings at the minimum (max performance) or at the maximum (max > quality - which by the was is at 4X AA and 8X Anis. Filtering). This > seems very strange to me.

This says your CPU is limiting your video card. The card is waiting for more info to throw up on the screen and the cpu is too busy with other items to fully feed the video. > > The only way for me to adjust my fps, is to adjust the in game > options. For example, I can increase framerate by reducing the number > of cars I see ahead. CPU again...the horsepower needed to calculate the positions and movements of the ai cars is overwhelming your cpu. > > This is driving me crazy! Why is my framerate not changing when I > change the resolution and driver settings?! Should I return my card? > Do I have a faulty card? HELP! nope! Card sounds great...it's just kinda loafing right now. hasn't even broken into a sweat. Just make sure the last three shadow options on the the lower right portion of the graphics options screen are turned off. And for good measure you might want to check your SMoothvision settings and your ansitropic settings. > > SkykingUSA > Was that a Cessna or a Beach? dave henrie

So, even at 800x600, my 1.8 P4 CPU can't keep up with what the video card wants huh? Wow, I guess I have a better video card than I thought. It would be clearer for me if I knew what the CPU's role was in this game. I suppose, based on my results, the CPU is being used largely for calculating information about other cars and very little to do with picture quality. The main difference in fps is definitely when I change the number of cars drawn. Thanks for the information! I don't remember what plane I flew - it was so long ago. SkykingUSA "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> [email hidden] (SkykingUSA) wrote in > news:[email hidden]: > > > I too am having problems with Nascar 2003 and my new Radeon 9700 video > > card. Anyone, please tell me if this sounds correct to you! > > > > My system is a 1.8 GHz P4, 512 MB RAM, AGP 4x, Radeon 9700 (non-pro > > version). I have installed the Catalyst 3.5 drivers. When I play > > Nascar 2003, I start the race at the back of the pack at around 22 > > fps. In-game options are all default. During the race, my fps never > > drops below 18 and has gone as high as 52, but usually is in the > > twenties somewhere. > > > > The kicker (and what I don't understand) is this: I get this same > > performance (within 3 fps) when I run at 800x600 or at 1600x1200. I > > also get this same performance whether I have my Catalyst driver > > settings at the minimum (max performance) or at the maximum (max > > quality - which by the was is at 4X AA and 8X Anis. Filtering). This > > seems very strange to me. > > This says your CPU is limiting your video card. The card is waiting

for

Quoted text (19 lines)

> more info to throw up on the screen and the cpu is too busy with other > items to fully feed the video. > > > > > The only way for me to adjust my fps, is to adjust the in game > > options. For example, I can increase framerate by reducing the number > > of cars I see ahead. > > CPU again...the horsepower needed to calculate the positions and > movements of the ai cars is overwhelming your cpu. > > > > This is driving me crazy! Why is my framerate not changing when I > > change the resolution and driver settings?! Should I return my card? > > Do I have a faulty card? HELP! > > nope! Card sounds great...it's just kinda loafing right now. hasn't > even broken into a sweat. Just make sure the last three shadow options on > the the lower right portion of the graphics options screen are turned off. > And for good measure you might want to check your SMoothvision settings

and > your ansitropic settings. > > > > SkykingUSA > > > Was that a Cessna or a Beach? > dave henrie

Are you thinkin of the Cessna Skyhawk Dave? Ill likely go to my grave remembering the call sign of my first solo aircraft. Tomahawk-Niner1414 :) (piper) Real men sit ON the wing not under it :)) Mitch > Was that a Cessna or a Beach? > dave henrie

I agree! I was trained and first solo'd on a Piper Cherokee, then flew mostly Piper Warriors after that. Ah, the good ol' days. SkykingUSA "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<EXDOa.100$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Are you thinkin of the Cessna Skyhawk Dave? > > Ill likely go to my grave remembering the call sign of my first solo > aircraft. Tomahawk-Niner1414 :) (piper) Real men sit ON the wing not > under it :)) > > Mitch > > > > Was that a Cessna or a Beach? > > dave henrie

The Cherokee was like a cadillac after the Tomahawk :) "SkykingUSA" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I agree! I was trained and first solo'd on a Piper Cherokee, then > flew mostly Piper Warriors after that. Ah, the good ol' days. > > SkykingUSA > > > "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<EXDOa.100$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > Are you thinkin of the Cessna Skyhawk Dave? > > > > Ill likely go to my grave remembering the call sign of my first solo > > aircraft. Tomahawk-Niner1414 :) (piper) Real men sit ON the wing not > > under it :)) > > > > Mitch > > > > > > > Was that a Cessna or a Beach? > > > dave henrie

For all you who are interested, I thought I'd post my results here. Well, I installed the game and my new Radeon 9700 card on another system: P4 2.4 GHz 768 MB RAM AGP 4x Radeon 9700 (non-pro version) Catalyst 3.5 drivers Catalyst settings: AA: 4x AF: 16x Vsynch:On Resolution: 1280x960 32-bit in a window Windows XP Pro Default in game options except where noted below 42 cars visible in front (only 28 in the race though) 14 sounds Extreme Texture level When I play Nascar 2003, I start the race at the back of the pack at around 35 fps now (22 with my other 1.8 GHz system). During the race, my fps is usually in the 30s, 40s or 50s and has gone as high as 102 when I'm facing the outside wall in a corner (not a desireable position, but great for performance!). I am surprised that this game is so CPU intensive. I would have thought it would be more like the 3D shooter games I am used to playing like Unreal, Quake, Return to Castle Wolfenstien. In those games it always appeared to be restricted by my video card, not my CPU. Well, thanks to this newsgroup, I decided not to return my video card, but to upgrade my processor and now I have a great gaming environment! Thanks a ton to all of you who took the time to respond - damn, I love the internet. SkykingUSA "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<EXDOa.100$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Are you thinkin of the Cessna Skyhawk Dave? > > Ill likely go to my grave remembering the call sign of my first solo > aircraft. Tomahawk-Niner1414 :) (piper) Real men sit ON the wing not > under it :)) > > Mitch > > > > Was that a Cessna or a Beach? > > dave henrie

In article <EXDOa.100$[email hidden]>, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> writes: >Are you thinkin of the Cessna Skyhawk Dave? > >Ill likely go to my grave remembering the call sign of my first solo >aircraft. Tomahawk-Niner1414 :) (piper) Real men sit ON the wing not >under it :)) > Another hobby I wish I could afford. I *really* need to win the lotto, or inherit a fortune...<g> Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.